Greatest teams of all time.

[quincywagstaff]

I think part of the reason we romanticise the past too much is that we have a better understanding of the form and faults of modern teams. Take the 2010-11 Australia batting side for example which on paper looks amazing with Ponting, Clarke, Hussey and Katich all at the same time. But they batted like arse for a period of about two years with Shane Watson, who will never be remembered as a great batsman, actually being the form player.

It makes me think an even better topic would be Test sides that looked great on paper that had terrible series or bad runs of form. India in 2011 Eng & Oz 11/12 is a modern standout as it looked on paper as one of the all-time great batting lineups but they just couldn't deliver because most of them were past their best.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah, it was a great side on paper and if not for the famous Langer/Gilchrist partnership, would've been 1-1 going into Perth where they had the pace attack to match Australia but they were demoralised post-Hobart and just limped out of the series.

Wouldn't really count Abdul Razzaq in terms of Tests; had all his success on that tour in ODIs. Only played one Test and was dropped. Mushtaq got mauled in Brisbane and he was past his best by that time anyway. For whatever reason Waqar Younis was a consistent disappointment in Australia.

Ijaz had a great record against Australia and scored a century that series but overall had some ordinary dismissals and was coming to end. Saeed Anwar played superbly that series but then was injured for the final Test.

They didn't deserve 3-0 that series. That same Hobart test Langer was almost certainly caught behind early on which would have made a very big difference.
They were also in very strong positions in the other 2 tests at times (3/280ish on Day 1 at Brisbane IIRC, and had Aus 4/50 in Perth before Langer & Ponting put on 300).

 

[Adders]

Yes but would Strauss's side beat Vaughan's? The change seam bowlers were very unsettled in Strauss's sides. 2003 - 2005 had a really settled pace quartet - real pace as well with Jones, Harmison and Flintoff and not your Anderson/Broad medium stuff. They beat South Africa away and arguably the greatest team there has ever been at home, a series in which Warne took 40 wickets! They also beat the Windies away who, fair enough were in free fall but they still had Lara and were not quite the disgrace we see today.

Strauss's beat Australian sides with players whose own mothers would struggle to remember their name. Michael Beer! Ben Hilfenhaus! Xavier Doherty!

Not a doubt in my mind that the 2010/11 Strauss team was better than the 2005 Vaughan side.

The major assets that 2010/11 have over 2005 is Prior and Swann..........the gulf between those 2 and Jones and GIles is simply massive. That alone tips the balance for mine, but if you look at 2010/11 the only possible passenger we carried in that Ashes series was your mate Colly........but **** it even he earnt his money for his ridiculous fielding. G Jones, Ian Bell, Giles and Harmy (after Lords) were all average to **** in 2005.

And you can knock the Aussie side of that series but apart from South Africa no one else was going there and winning.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Not a doubt in my mind that the 2010/11 Strauss team was better than the 2005 Vaughan side.

The major assets that 2010/11 have over 2005 is Prior and Swann..........the gulf between those 2 and Jones and GIles is simply massive. That alone tips the balance for mine, but if you look at 2010/11 the only possible passenger we carried in that Ashes series was your mate Colly........but **** it even he earnt his money for his ridiculous fielding. G Jones, Ian Bell, Giles and Harmy (after Lords) were all average to **** in 2005.

And you can knock the Aussie side of that series but apart from South Africa no one else was going there and winning.

I'll concede you the spinners but I still would take 2003-2005 any day of the week. More intimidating seam attack. Beat arguably the greatest team that has ever existed. Beat the Proteas away whereas Strauss's side were completely dismantled by the Proteas on English soil.

 

[fredfertang]

I'll concede you the spinners but I still would take 2003-2005 any day of the week. More intimidating seam attack. Beat arguably the greatest team that has ever existed. Beat the Proteas away whereas Strauss's side were completely dismantled by the Proteas on English soil.

A case of heart ruling head I think - agree totally though

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'll concede you the spinners but I still would take 2003-2005 any day of the week. More intimidating seam attack. Beat arguably the greatest team that has ever existed. Beat the Proteas away whereas Strauss's side were completely dismantled by the Proteas on English soil.

2005 England were far better than 2010-11 England. Maybe on paper 2010-11 look stronger (as people are saying) but not when you look at how they actually played.

Just taking into account the opposition the 2010-11 Australia side were nothing compared to 2005 Australia (even without McGrath). 2010-11 had a few good players but they were all in **** form, not just outplayed like they were in 2005. and 2005 Aus had Warne. 2010-11 had Doherty and Michael Beer. I don't know what it was about 2005 but they never got the same reverse swing like they did in that series.

 

[Burgey]

2005 England were far better than 2010-11 England. Maybe on paper 2010-11 look stronger (as people are saying) but not when you look at how they actually played.

Just taking into account the opposition the 2010-11 Australia side were nothing compared to 2005 Australia (even without McGrath). 2010-11 had a few good players but they were all in **** form, not just outplayed like they were in 2005. and 2005 Aus had Warne. 2010-11 had Doherty and Michael Beer. I don't know what it was about 2005 but they never got the same reverse swing like they did in that series.

 

[the big bambino]

Free coke bottle top in every packet.

 

[Red]

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
M.Waugh
S.Waugh
Martyn/Lehmann
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee/Kaspa/Bichel/MacGill
Gillespie
McGrath

This combo was epically strong.

 

[Red]

Hutton
Edrich
May
Compton
Graveney
Bailey
Evans
Laker
Lock
Trueman
Bedser


Would've been a decent combo too.

 

[jimmy101]

1921 Australians, who defeated England & South Africa in consecutive series', winning 7 out of 8 Tests (the other was a draw at Durban).

Herbie Collins
Warren Bardsley
Charlie Macartney
Jack Ryder
Warwick Armstrong*
Johnny Taylor
Jack Gregory
Hunter "Stork" Hendry
Bert Oldfield+
Arthur Mailey
Ted McDonald

 

[Starfighter]

Frankly the lineup for the last two tests in 20-21 looks stronger, because Kelleway was much better than Hendry.

 

[mr_mister]

South Africa looked quite good in the mid to late 90s


Kirsten
Gibbs
Cullinan
Rhodes
Kallis
Cronje
Pollock
Klusener
McMillan
Boucher/Richardson
Donald

 

[Adders]

2005 England were far better than 2010-11 England. Maybe on paper 2010-11 look stronger (as people are saying) but not when you look at how they actually played.

Just taking into account the opposition the 2010-11 Australia side were nothing compared to 2005 Australia (even without McGrath). 2010-11 had a few good players but they were all in **** form, not just outplayed like they were in 2005. and 2005 Aus had Warne. 2010-11 had Doherty and Michael Beer. I don't know what it was about 2005 but they never got the same reverse swing like they did in that series.

Nah, totally disagree.

Never mind on paper, if you look at how they actually played as you say, how can 2005 be better?? As I pointed out to kennedy the 2005 team carried Ian Bell, Geraint Jones, Harmy (who was great at Lords and pretty cod ordinary for the next 4 tests) and Ashley Giles..........who did not perform in 10/11? Only Colly really........every other player performed in that series.

Yes the 2005 Aussies were an ATG team, and way stronger than the 10/11 side, but any Aussie side is next to impossible to beat in Australia. Apart from South Africa no one else has won in Aus since the West Indies in 92/93!! An away in Aus is gold..........to do it with 3 innings victories is a ridiculous achievement, to me that will always trump a very narrow home win no matter how good the opposition was on paper.

 

[weldone]

I love how the current England side has our 2 leading wicket takers ever, the leading run scorer and arguably one of the best bats we have ever produced and we would get mullered by virtually every team mentioned above.

Yes cricket teams consist of 11 players, not 4.

 

[jimmy101]

If we take a particular Test series & evaluate the strength of both participating teams combined, you'd be hard pressed to find many teams that were better than the two sides that contested the Frank Worrell trophy in 1960/61. Not only do we have great players on both sides, but two of the great captains (as evidenced by MM's thread). I wonder how these 22 players would stack up against, say, both sides from the 2005 Ashes series?

Conrad Hunte
Collie Smith
Rohan Kanhai
Garfield Sobers
Frank Worrell*
Seymour Nurse
Joe Solomon
Gerry Alexander+
Sonny Ramadhin
Wes Hall
Alf Valentine

Colin McDonald
Bob Simpson
Neil Harvey
Norm O'Neill
Peter Burge
Ken Mackay
Alan Davidson
Richie Benaud*
Wally Grout+
Ian Meckiff
Lindsay Kline

 

[AndrewB]

Certainly one of the great series. The 1902 Ashes was another, though it would have been better if the last two Tests had been the other way round to give it a cliff-hanger finish.

 

[subshakerz]

South Africa looked quite good in the mid to late 90s


Kirsten
Gibbs
Cullinan
Rhodes
Kallis
Cronje
Pollock
Klusener
McMillan
Boucher/Richardson
Donald

I reckon their side from 2010-2013 was better, especially in batting, with Smith, Amla, Kallis, deDilliviers, Philander, Morkel and Steyn.

 

[fredfertang]

If we take a particular Test series & evaluate the strength of both participating teams combined, you'd be hard pressed to find many teams that were better than the two sides that contested the Frank Worrell trophy in 1960/61. Not only do we have great players on both sides, but two of the great captains (as evidenced by MM's thread). I wonder how these 22 players would stack up against, say, both sides from the 2005 Ashes series?

Conrad Hunte
Collie Smith
Rohan Kanhai
Garfield Sobers
Frank Worrell*
Seymour Nurse
Joe Solomon
Gerry Alexander+
Sonny Ramadhin
Wes Hall
Alf Valentine

Colin McDonald
Bob Simpson
Neil Harvey
Norm O'Neill
Peter Burge
Ken Mackay
Alan Davidson
Richie Benaud*
Wally Grout+
Ian Meckiff
Lindsay Kline

Sadly the Smith was Cammie and not Collie, who would almost certainly have made a big difference to the outcome

 

[S.Kennedy]

Nah, totally disagree.

Never mind on paper, if you look at how they actually played as you say, how can 2005 be better?? As I pointed out to kennedy the 2005 team carried Ian Bell, Geraint Jones, Harmy (who was great at Lords and pretty cod ordinary for the next 4 tests) and Ashley Giles..........who did not perform in 10/11? Only Colly really........every other player performed in that series.

Yes the 2005 Aussies were an ATG team, and way stronger than the 10/11 side, but any Aussie side is next to impossible to beat in Australia. Apart from South Africa no one else has won in Aus since the West Indies in 92/93!! An away in Aus is gold..........to do it with 3 innings victories is a ridiculous achievement, to me that will always trump a very narrow home win no matter how good the opposition was on paper.

Harmison took 17 wickets in 2005! That is more wickets than any England player in 2010-11 except Anderson - and Tremlett who also took 17 in 2010-11.

That Australian side were piss poor compared to 2005. Rotating Michael Beer, Hilfenhaus and Xavier Somebody and people like that haha